News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Nuclear power is the fastest way to slash greenhouse gas ... by Amygaz on Sunday April 07, 2019 @08:20AM (#19596363)
And here is the wiki page to answer how many since the 70’s (hint, it’s a lot): https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_and_radiation_accide...
Re:Nuclear power is the fastest way to slash greenhouse gas ... by kortilla on Sunday April 07, 2019 @01:16PM (#19598264)
I count 18 after the 70s. Do you realize how irrelevant that is given the millions per year coal is killing?
Re:Nuclear power is the fastest way to slash greenhouse gas ... by godelski on Tuesday April 09, 2019 @12:23AM (#19611780)
I've been trying to figure out this problem. It seems like people understand the dangers of nuclear (with some overstatement[0]). The problem I see is that people don't understand dangers of other sources. Like even solar kills more than nuclear (on a per kilowatt basis, and including predicted deaths from cancer of Fukushima and Chernobyl). Or they don't understand how small the waste is in comparison to other sources (~soda can a year compared to train fulls a day (coal)). I don't know if this is due to fear or humans having a hard time comparing large numbers. Or some combination.

[0] example being that meltdowns make a place inhospitable for centuries. Fukushima's exclusion zone is shrinking fast. And only Chernobyl and Fukushima have exclusion zones. Plus, those ares have thriving wildlife and vegetation.